The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case on Monday that tests the boundaries of presidential powers, confronting the question of whether President Barack Obama exceeded his authority with unilateral action to spare millions of people in the country illegally from deportation.
Advertisement
In 2012, President Obama announced his intention to take action in 2014 to grant relief to eligible individuals who came to the United States as children, DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), and to eligible parents of children who are citizens or lawful permanent residents, DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans). The new program for parents, known as Deferred Action for Parents of Americans, and the expanded program for children could reach as many as 4 million people, according to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute.
President Obama’s plan to offer temporary protection from deportation to more than 4 million undocumented immigrants ran into opposition from conservative justices on the Supreme Court Monday, but the outcome of the case remained unclear.
But with the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, the eight-member court could deadlock 4-4.
That injunction was twice upheld by a panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, leading to the appeal to the Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case.
The states, joined by congressional Republicans, argue that Obama doesn’t have the power to effectively change immigration law.
But Texas’s Keller contends that the president went too far when he “changed the law” on his own. A few years ago, it was the five most conservative justices, including Roberts, who held that journalists and others did not have standing to challenge a federal law that allows the National Security Agency to monitor communications between those in the United States and specified foreign countries.
“The Constitution prescribes immigration law be fixed by Congress not by presidential fiat”, Abbott said at the time. “We do not want to separate from our families and we do not want to live in fear anymore”.
The immigration battle was waged on two fronts before the court, as the Obama administration fought with Texas and 25 other states as well as with the House of Representatives, which previously blocked the president’s effort to confer legal status to some of the nation’s more than 11 million illegal immigrants.
Should Obama’s plan succeed, he believes the newly legalized immigrants can contribute to tax collections, spur the economy and give them access to federal “earned-benefit” programs.
The government also urges the court to rule that the states have no legal standing to sue over the policy, because immigration has always been the province of the federal government and because the states aren’t required or forbidden to do anything under the program.
SHAW: A 4-4 tie is a definite possibility, and a tie in this case would leave the law in a state of profound uncertainty.
“It’s as if the president is setting the policy and Congress is executing it. That’s just upside-down”, said Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who is expected to be an important voice as the court decides what to do.
The Supreme Court should recognize that both Republican and Democratic presidents have issued numerous executive orders on immigration.
April 18, 2016 – Oral arguments scheduled in United States v. Texas. They could also apply to work while they are here, meaning they’d be able to earn more money for their families.
So the arguments of this case will be a mix of debate over immigration and executive authority… all happening before a divided court during an election year.
She said she will propose comprehensive immigration reform legislation within 100 days of being in office and create a path to citizenship for undocumented people.
Advertisement
Andrew Pincus, a lawyer who supports the administration’s position, says that allowing Texas to bring the case would have broad implications. Texas and the other states that brought the lawsuit say Obama, in taking executive action that bypassed Congress, crossed that line because Congress is in charge of deciding who is a lawful or unlawful immigrant.
